User talk:Logantp
Fanfic Fanfic isn't allowed on this site outside user pages. If you want to create a Nerax page, the SC Fanfiction Wiki is the more advisable site.--Hawki (talk) 22:13, March 21, 2015 (UTC) You'd be better off talking to Psi about SCStalker, as I wasn't privy to the circumstances of the ban bar the reason given in the log.--Hawki (talk) 08:44, March 22, 2015 (UTC) Edits Your Oracle gif is appreciated, but the other edits have been less productive. If you're going to create an article (e.g. the prison ship), please format it and categorize it correctly, don't just leave it for others to finish. Citations follow the referencing policy and images must follow . Also, the Mallast IIII article especially needs a source - this is potentially the third time you've made a fanfic article.--Hawki (talk) 11:51, March 24, 2015 (UTC) Again with the fanfiction thing. If the recon tank isn't a fan work, source it. If it is, it's meant for the fanfic wiki.--Hawki (talk) 22:06, March 28, 2015 (UTC) Destruction Note that while stuff like SC: Destruction is allowed, character articles aren't, as it's classified as a fan-work because of its unauthorized status. Just a heads up.--Hawki (talk) 22:16, August 17, 2015 (UTC) :Same case as maps I'm afraid. This is spelt out in the wiki's fan policy, but basically, a fan article can have any level of detail, but all information relating to the fan work must be kept on the page.--Hawki (talk) 22:31, August 17, 2015 (UTC) ::I say again, fan works are confined to fan works. A custom campaigns category isn't needed when Enslavers is already grouped as a campaign (difference being Enslavers is canonical), and material such as Subjection is covered under the fan categorization of fan map and arcade map (by virtue of spotlight). As I said, Destruction can be as detailed as you want, but very little, if anything, should stem from the map, nor should it have categorization outside fan map.--Hawki (talk) 00:05, August 18, 2015 (UTC) Repeatedly violating fan policy Enough is enough. Edits such as this one are not acceptable. You've already been told about the fanfiction policy before. In addition, deleting warnings is not acceptable. Doing so again will result in a block. Previously contributors interested in StarCraft fan campaigns have created their own wikis (often Wikia wikis) based on the campaigns. We are happy to link this wiki to such wikis. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 23:47, August 17, 2015 (UTC) Sources Please see Talk:StarCraft: Destruction. The "sources" you are using are of your own making, and don't contain anything verifiable. Do you have any sources, published by someone else, that actually confirms what you are saying? - Meco (talk, ) 00:30, August 18, 2015 (UTC) :Meco's got the right of it. Destruction I'm more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for, but Resurrection has nothing for it bar your claim that it exists. It doesn't help that both these articles need more tidying for sources, titles (it's "StarCraft," not "Starcraft"), etc.--Hawki (talk) 00:46, August 18, 2015 (UTC) Well its true. A dude named Redeemer022 or something knows about Destruction. http://sc1archive.weebly.com/ :There's no information there. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 00:53, August 18, 2015 (UTC) ::Concur. No information for "Legacy Campaigns" or "Resurrection". I am also of the position that there's no information for "Destruction" either. I am in favour of scrapping all of them. ::If it does turn out that "Resurrection" and "Destruction" exist and are part of a series and there's still a paucity of information, they should just go into the same article. Assuming such things can be verified, naturally. - Meco (talk, ) 01:08, August 18, 2015 (UTC) No Im right these are real. Here is my source. http://sc1legacycampaigns.weebly.com/ :Again, that doesn't prove anything. It's someone claiming that he created the Legacy Campaigns, which if anything, indicates that it's a fan work. Unless there's proof that this was a commercial product, there's no precedent to keep the article(s).--Hawki (talk) 01:14, August 18, 2015 (UTC) Because Stratospace and HunCraft were kept. No one plays them but if people are interested then they can find info on them. I write these articles for public benefit, not my own. Also, would I waste my day making fake articles and websites and all this? I have better things to do. Believe me these are legit but extremely old, even Kinghue01 forgot most of this stuff. :What matters is the substance of the sources. I haven't checked Stratospace, but HunCraft's seem to pass inspection. The sources for "Resurrection"/"Destruction"/"Legacy Campaigns" do not. :And stop making pointless redirects. It's also Star'C'''raft (capital C in the centre), not Starcraft. - Meco (talk, ) 01:25, August 18, 2015 (UTC) Ill make u guys a deal. Stop ganging up on me, Ill add the stuff I know from the sites and then stop editing them and adding stuff u guys dont wont me to add. I spent a long time on those articles, dont want them deleted. :Also, take a look at File_talk:DestructionCover1.jpg. If the work was a commercial-work as you claim, then it is even more imperative that you provide the source for the image. - Meco (talk, ) 02:09, August 18, 2015 (UTC) ::We are not "picking" on you. This wiki has a sourcing policy that you need to follow and have not been doing. Simply adding links as "sources" is not enough. The sources have to support what you say. You also need to step back and look at what you're doing logically. We shouldn't need to revert your edits to, say, auto-turret when we've already talked to you about the fan policy. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 02:20, August 18, 2015 (UTC) General editing Using other articles as "sources" isn't acceptable. We do have a citation index that lists most of the sources you'd ever need. And things like the headers: you start at level 2 headers ( ), not level 3 headers ( ). Take a look at the articles you've been creating; take note of how they look after edits by other users. - Meco (talk, ) 13:18, August 18, 2015 (UTC) :Please familiarize yourself with referencing - mission refs are sourced internally, not externally. Also, what counts as a good article is subjective, but stuff like "pack leaders" and "packs" isn't really covering anything outside what the primal zerg page already states (as opposed to the brood page, which does have information contained to said page). Creating stub articles and expecting others to clean up after you isn't helping anyone.--Hawki (talk) 14:07, August 18, 2015 (UTC) Templates Also, stop making templates. Judging from recent edits, you have no sense of what new templates are required. - Meco (talk, ) 13:30, August 18, 2015 (UTC) Blocked :For future reference, this user also likely used ; similar behaviour with creating unneeded templates, and the IP became blocked when the above went into effect ("Automatically block the last IP address used by this user" option). - Meco (talk, ) 23:36, August 18, 2015 (UTC)